Nick's Collingwood Bulletin Board

K wrote:Despite being super happy, I'm still calling bullshit on them claiming they would have gone Murphy at pick 6.[/b]

Okay, E. But another hint it may be true is that Murphy was there at all and was the last one present to be picked. People have been suggesting each top-10-pick club was able to nominate two players for the AFL to invite to be there. It does seem that maybe CFC nominated JS and him.[/quote]

If it is true, people should be fired for considering wasting a first round draft pick on someone you can get in the third round. It doesn't even matter if this kid Murphy turns out to be the best player in the draft. The level of ineptitude required to misread the draft so badly and forego the chance to get another A grader (at 6) PLUS him (at 39) would have been a catastrophic mistake. I dont believe the Collingwood recruiting department is that stupid!

On the other hand, i believe that they are smart enough to understand that if Stephenson turns out to be a bust due to his heart condition, it would be a VERY good idea to lay the groundwork for getting us to forgive them by putting on the record that we still got our guy........

Can't we just be happy we got this kid and welcome him to Collingwood and wish him well?

RudeBoy wrote:Can't we just be happy we got this kid and welcome him to Collingwood and wish him well?

Pick 6 or not, this kid was projected to go in the teens and we landed him at 39 which is exciting for the club, especially since we didn't have a genuine 2nd round selection in this draft.

With Sharenberg, Maynard, Howe, Langdon, Goldsack and Josh Smith all vying for a similar spot (give or tack some positional tactics to any of the above), I cant see Murphy being required too early in the piece but he certainly appears to have the tools to develop over the next 18 months.

So we rated him as the 6th best Talent in the Draft

http://www.collingwoodfc.com.au/video/2 ... s-realised

Dave The Man wrote:So we rated him as the 6th best Talent in the Draft

http://www.collingwoodfc.com.au/video/2 ... s-realised

no, that is just the story we are running with so that Collingwood fans will stupidly believe we did great at the draft (even if Stephenson has a heart attack during round 1 next season).

Look its really smart by Collingwood and it seems to be working with all of you guys (proving that the tactic works). But its complete bullshit.

Well, E, I don't think it affects the Club too much whether people do or do not believe their claim. But it would be more than a little odd for them to put that much effort into a conspiracy: duping a journalist so that he puts out the claim, (probably) inviting the kid (via the AFL) to attend the draft, having Eddie tell the kid himself that we rated him 6 in the obligatory phone call, ...

As for your rumblings about firing people, well, as you know, there are some shuffling of roles, though not outright firings, that are now taking place.

E wrote:

Dave The Man wrote:So we rated him as the 6th best Talent in the Draft

http://www.collingwoodfc.com.au/video/2 ... s-realised

no, that is just the story we are running with so that Collingwood fans will stupidly believe we did great at the draft (even if Stephenson has a heart attack during round 1 next season).

Look its really smart by Collingwood and it seems to be working with all of you guys (proving that the tactic works). But its complete bullshit.

Guess you never Watched the Video Then

^
I did. i love propaganda pieces and the Grind is one of those shows where you come away thinking EVERY single player is determined to deliver a flag, every player is working harder than ever before and there is total unity at the club. Its awesome (especially since there are currently no games to prove these theories one way or the other).

And a brief note to others.

1. How hard is it to say "we rated him highly and would have taken him at 6 if Stephenson wasn't available"...... you make it sound like that would take a lot of effort.

2. To people who say we are lucky that player A slipped down to us because we didnt have a second rounder, ponder this. It is guys like Pendlebury who actually go higher than everyone thought that often turn out to be the stars and there is often a reason why players slip that makes us all realize why they slipped years down the road. I'm not saying that Murphy cant be the next Dayne Beams, but its no certainty (and its not MORE OR LESS likely to happen because he was highly rated on draft day by some) ...

E wrote:1. How hard is it to say "we rated him highly and would have taken him at 6 if Stephenson wasn't available"...... you make it sound like that would take a lot of effort.
...

It's not "hard" in the sense of requiring enormous skill or stamina or financial resources. It's just very odd, in the sense of "Who could be bothered to do all of that for no good reason?" And it's "hard" in the sense that one might not naturally be inclined to tell a huge lie as one of the first things you say to your new recruit... It's not just nameless people saying this to nameless other people, you know; the president said it to NM himself.

K wrote:It's not "hard" in the sense of requiring enormous skill or stamina or financial resources. It's just very odd, in the sense of "Who could be bothered to do all of that for no good reason?" And it's "hard" in the sense that one might not naturally be inclined to tell a huge lie as one of the first things you say to your new recruit... It's not just nameless people saying this to nameless other people, you know; the president said it to NM himself.

There you go again. All that work! Its just feeding a line to reporters (which they will jump on). The idea that a football club WOULDN'T do that beggars belief.

We did an entire club review to provide cover for the reappointment of Nathan Buckley. I find it odd that you don'[t consider that PR exercise too much work. And yet, the recruiting team dropping a little morsel for the hungry press to pick up is "too much effort". Naive.

E wrote:It's not "hard" in the sense of requiring enormous skill or stamina or financial resources. It's just very odd, in the sense of "Who could be bothered to do all of that for no good reason?" And it's "hard" in the sense that one might not naturally be inclined to tell a huge lie as one of the first things you say to your new recruit... It's not just nameless people saying this to nameless other people, you know; the president said it to NM himself.

There you go again. All that work! Its just feeding a line to reporters (which they will jump on). The idea that a football club WOULDN'T do that beggars belief.

We did an entire club review to provide cover for the reappointment of Nathan Buckley. I find it odd that you don'[t consider that PR exercise too much work. And yet, the recruiting team dropping a little morsel for the hungry press to pick up is "too much effort". Naive.[/quote]

You're entitled to your own opinion, but don't just blatantly ignore things and distort what other posters say. Read what I wrote. You know full well that it wasn't just telling something to a reporter. There was no good reason for any club to get someone invited to the draft just to fool their own supporters, at a time when they should have been thinking only of who they wanted to draft. And Eddie told N. Murphy in their phone conversation that the club ranked him 6. Do you really think it makes sense for the president to tell the new recruit a huge lie in one of his first sentences, just to fool supporters?

In fact, some people who assume that it's all true are critical of the club for letting this info out. I at a minimum agree with them that making public the claim that we ranked our first two picks at 3 and 6 puts more pressure on Hine, not less.

Ned Guy said at the AGM they genuinely rated Murphy at 6. Didn't really have skin in the game at this stage so take it however you chose.

Seriously, I couldn't care less who rated what player where.

I'm just eagerly looking forward to seeing them don the black and white and getting an opportunity to play for our club.

Does anyone know whether Murphy scored any behinds when he kicked 7 goals against Brander? I'm wondering whether it was 7.0, because in another game he kicked 6.0. If it was 13.0 from those two games, that might be another indication this guy really can kick.